Smithfield supervisor Griffin goes to court for compensation

Tuesday

Dec 18, 2012 at 12:01 AMDec 18, 2012 at 8:28 AM

Smithfield Township Supervisor Christine Griffin pressed her claim in magistrate court Monday for $2,100 in additional compensation because, she said, a hostile work environment forced her to perform duties outside the township building at additional cost.

DAVID PIERCE

Smithfield Township Supervisor Christine Griffin pressed her claim in magistrate court Monday for $2,100 in additional compensation because, she said, a hostile work environment forced her to perform duties outside the township building at additional cost.

Griffin herself was charged in July 2011 with disorderly conduct after allegedly yelling and swearing at receptionist Lynn Prior and Supervisor Brian Barrett.

That case was dismissed last December after Magisterial District Judge Brian Germano said he couldn't rule beyond a reasonable doubt that Griffin was guilty.

But Griffin said she was advised by her former attorney, Dan Lyons, to never again enter the township building unless she had a supporting witness, in the event there was a new incident.

Griffin said this resulted in her spending money on a cell phone with email capability to keep up with township correspondence and copy documents, a video recording device to record any incident, and additional time to complete her duties outside the township building.

"I'm entitled to hourly pay for duties," Griffin said after initially being pressed to state the basis of her compensation request.

Later, she pointed to cell phone and computer connection bills she said were made necessary by not being able to work at the township building.

But attorney Jim Fareri, hired by majority supervisors Brian Barrett and Stephen Carey to defend the township, said state law limits nearly all supervisor compensation to $2,500 per year. Barrett and Carey have additional township duties — besides elective supervisors — for which they earn wages.

Griffin, representing herself this time, called Lyons to the stand, who confirmed he advised her not to enter the township building alone. But Lyons denied Griffin's contention he also told her to bring recording equipment.

Griffin said she reached a "reasonable" conclusion from the conversation that she needed a video recorder.

Griffin said she had no choice but to avoid the township building whenever possible, following the disorderly conduct case.

"I was really, really afraid to come into the township building because two people could say anything..." to support a new charge against her, Griffin said.

She called the $2,100 compensation request tiny compared to money Barrett and Carey receive for appointed township jobs, money spent by the township to fight the claim, and a $3.5 million township budget.

"This is chump change," Griffin said. "This is baby spit."

Germano asked Griffin for an itemized accounting for reimbursement. She came up with expenses totaling about $2,100. Griffin said the other supervisors should pay an additional unstated sum for punitive damages, and that Barrett and Carey — not the township — should pay for hiring Fareri to defend the case.

Fareri said Griffin's attorney never told her not to enter the township building, only that she should have witnesses.

Griffin had a key to the building and a personal phone and email there, he added.

Fareri said it is "extremely troubling" that Griffin admitted making personal calls on a cell phone for which she seeks total township compensation. Germano said personal calls shouldn't matter if Griffin is paying a set amount for unlimited use.

The law is clearly on the township's side in rejecting the compensation request, Fareri added.

The two sides wrapped up their case and Germano said he would rule at a future date.